Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
The Hindenburg wasn't so much inflated as filled; no meaningful volume is saved when the intended gas isn't in it. Blimps, however, have their "balloon"'s shape defined exlusively by the interior gasses, and do deflate.
Nasa Deploys inflatable modules to ISS
- Thread starter wbnc
- Start date
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Modern engineering and material science can probably make the frame collapsible, and by extension, extensible.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Certainly, but then it wouldn't be rigid; it would be variable geometry. Which the ISS Module already does.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
The framework does give it rigidity, where a balloon can pop.
And when transiting through hyperspace, you might want to guarantee a consistent volume.
And when transiting through hyperspace, you might want to guarantee a consistent volume.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Blimps do not pop, because their materials do not fail that way; they merely get a modest hole, through which gasses may escape, depending on the exact circumstances.
The ISS module has some articulated structure, which gives it some rigidity when inflated; it “folds out” as much as “inflates”. It’s enough to support the shell through a few near-simultaneous micrometeoroid impacts, which it takes without developing a hole to the cabin-pressure layer. This is not, however, enough structure for significant thrusting, as per a starship, nor is it enough for suspension in an atmosphere, even weak “Jump Bubble” type atmospheres. Each of those changes would be a significant redesign, requiring much sturdier, and consequently, heavier, materials, and the two together would be heavier yet again.
The ISS module has some articulated structure, which gives it some rigidity when inflated; it “folds out” as much as “inflates”. It’s enough to support the shell through a few near-simultaneous micrometeoroid impacts, which it takes without developing a hole to the cabin-pressure layer. This is not, however, enough structure for significant thrusting, as per a starship, nor is it enough for suspension in an atmosphere, even weak “Jump Bubble” type atmospheres. Each of those changes would be a significant redesign, requiring much sturdier, and consequently, heavier, materials, and the two together would be heavier yet again.
Subzero001
Banded Mongoose
According to the article:
"The biggest concern is the safety of astronauts in structures that are not made of metal. Images of fabric being torn to shreds by micro-meteorites or space debris are easy to imagine.
In fact, the company says its inflatable structures are safer than metal ones. This is the result of advanced materials that can absorb impacts, and a thicker outer layer that includes water, which is not only tough, but also provides protection against radiation."
"Nor is all this mere theory. In 2006 and 2007 Bigelow Aerospace launched two free-flying, uncrewed stations, Genesis I and II, using repurposed Ukranian nuclear missiles. Both stations have been circling the Earth ever since, providing data on how they cope with the rigours of orbit. Attaching an inflatable module to a crewed space station will, the firm hopes, be the final step in proving that its technology works."
I like the idea, would work well in the scout mobile bases and possible jump fuel tanks for commercial including scouts, if not military as well.
"The biggest concern is the safety of astronauts in structures that are not made of metal. Images of fabric being torn to shreds by micro-meteorites or space debris are easy to imagine.
In fact, the company says its inflatable structures are safer than metal ones. This is the result of advanced materials that can absorb impacts, and a thicker outer layer that includes water, which is not only tough, but also provides protection against radiation."
"Nor is all this mere theory. In 2006 and 2007 Bigelow Aerospace launched two free-flying, uncrewed stations, Genesis I and II, using repurposed Ukranian nuclear missiles. Both stations have been circling the Earth ever since, providing data on how they cope with the rigours of orbit. Attaching an inflatable module to a crewed space station will, the firm hopes, be the final step in proving that its technology works."
I like the idea, would work well in the scout mobile bases and possible jump fuel tanks for commercial including scouts, if not military as well.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
The interesting part is if the material can survive a week long immersion in a hydrogen bath and either one or two gee constant acceleration.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
O.K., what's so different about your drop-tanks from what I've described so far?
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Nothing about the way the ISS module is constructed lends itself to a fuel tank design. Period.
It is both unnecessarily expensive, because it was designed to support a life-sustaining atmosphere, and because it’s entirely too fragile for the task, because it was never designed to be moved while inflated.
Drop-tanks would:
1. Be designed sufficiently sturdily so as to be movable
and 2. Not have the unnecessary expenses of a shell capable of supporting life-sustaining atmosphere
The two designs have nothing in common.
It is both unnecessarily expensive, because it was designed to support a life-sustaining atmosphere, and because it’s entirely too fragile for the task, because it was never designed to be moved while inflated.
Drop-tanks would:
1. Be designed sufficiently sturdily so as to be movable
and 2. Not have the unnecessary expenses of a shell capable of supporting life-sustaining atmosphere
The two designs have nothing in common.
Subzero001
Banded Mongoose
Well there always something like this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hObbL4DCesI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hObbL4DCesI
Subzero001
Banded Mongoose
If something along the lines like this is used in addition to the water layer...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6md1wgyo3Ik&ebc=ANyPxKrz8ktSuJOOIxeHHViOeNX6n_H1xYHN-bdENzS3qIxggWf38i94n5fAiq9R_wxPcdoI3o7I&nohtml5=False
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcHMVj43UMM
And couldn't you just inflate a bladder like you do in the cargo hold inside said habitat to hold your H3? if your worried about the jump bubble you could pump it dry to your internal tanks as the tanks are being emptied and have it against the hull or in a pocket that will close to shield it when its in "storage" mode. If your worried about the thruster performance hit just use some of the high thrust units to get you going to the 100D limit.
just some thoughts...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6md1wgyo3Ik&ebc=ANyPxKrz8ktSuJOOIxeHHViOeNX6n_H1xYHN-bdENzS3qIxggWf38i94n5fAiq9R_wxPcdoI3o7I&nohtml5=False
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcHMVj43UMM
And couldn't you just inflate a bladder like you do in the cargo hold inside said habitat to hold your H3? if your worried about the jump bubble you could pump it dry to your internal tanks as the tanks are being emptied and have it against the hull or in a pocket that will close to shield it when its in "storage" mode. If your worried about the thruster performance hit just use some of the high thrust units to get you going to the 100D limit.
just some thoughts...
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Subzero001 said:
I suspect the guy who authored that video mis-used the inflatable modules. I suspect those are there for when it stops at the lagrange point, according to the mission specs, where it is effectively motionless.
On that scale, they certainly could re-engineer the modules for motion, but then they would have to be braced from the outside too, not just the inside.
I would guess that the gravity ring is over-ambitious; everything I’ve read at Atomic Rockets suggests that they’re rather impractical.
This video seems like the work of a Kerbal fan type amateur, even if it’s based on a real concept.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Subzero001 said:
Like I said, you would have to re-engineer the whole “inflatable module” concept to be suitable. While something like that would be a good contribution to the skin against fast strikes, slow cutting strikes would tear right through it, and it still does nothing about the other end of the module being un-supported.
Additionally, that material technology is already covered by the “Gel Suit” in the Darrians book as well as the “Gel Cloth” in the Dilettante book. TL10 my ass...
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Jame Rowe said:
No, I told you you would have to do some serious “mutating” to it before it would be appropriate for the job you are trying to put it to, leaving it not remotely the same thing at all. The design needs to be re-engineered for your chosen application for it; it would be completely incorrect to use the existing design unaltered. You are perfectly welcome to put it into your game unaltered, but if a smart player tries to exploit all the weaknesses in that design to his benefit, you damn well better give him the credit for pointing out your misuse of it.
You’ve got this “when all you have is a hammer” mentality; the ISS Inflatable module is not the nail you are looking for.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
I never attacked you; I picked apart your poor line of reasoning. If you’re determined to ignore basic engineering principles in your game concepts, don’t be surprised when physicists and engineers don’t want to play with you anymore. An idea isn’t good merely because it’s yours. 
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
If you want to use them as external fuel bladders, assuming they can survive the amazing suction that empties them within a turn, the starship doesn't have to be moving when transitioning and the bladders can be attached there and then.
Or inflated.
Or inflated.
